Well it’s most likely a private beach (if you know the way Italian beaches are), but that’s not really the point – she has a reasonable expectation of privacy when her young son is involved in a natural act related to the natural (and legitimate) choice she has made in raising that child. There may be alternatives, but she does not have to conform to them.

The child is feeding, and, because there’s a danger of people equating that act with sexuality (with several examples here already), the breastfeeding should only be the business of the mother and child; it is not your concern, or my concern, when the child needs to be fed, or under what circumstances the child is fed, etc; instead, the child’s needs (and the mother’s needs to provide for that) override your right to look (and any long lingering looks would, I’m sure, find you on the wrong side of any law). Regardless, I’d figure that Stefani has a good case to sue any bloggers posting these photos.

As for ethics, it’s understood that a mother should have the right to breastfeed her kid and her kid has a right to be nurtured. Also, it should be understood that if your boob comes out anywhere outside of your home, there might be a perv around to snap a picture, and there’s a sea of perverts out there who’ll gladly put Fish’s hypothetical kids through college to have a chance to see the aforementioned picture. That’s practically Newtonian. I, for one, have been waiting for this nipple since like 1995. I’m just disappointed that it looks like a fake boob.

The idea of public and private is a shuttling term: even if in public, a contextual expectation of privacy is entirely possible. The mother shouldn’t have to neglect her child in any way to accommodate your right to not *have to* look at her naked breast. Can you see that your logic breaks down quite quickly there?

If you honestly think the only two possible options available are “pull tits out and ask everyone to look away” and “neglect baby” then I’m not very impressed by your opinions on logic.

If a scenario has two options, one being “use a little discretion”, and the other being “expect the entire world to accommodate you” then I think the former is a little more reasonable…don’t you? Doesn’t a blanket solve the whole problem? The blanket she has in her lap partially covering the baby already?

It is easier for you to not look / look away than for Stefani to breast-pump in advance, or delay, or cover up, or go inside. She doesn’t have to make any accommodations for your decision to look. You are the one looking. She is not magically unveiling for you.

Your logic rests on the notion that you would ultimately look regardless and find her accommodations for your gaze reasonable if she covered up (and unreasonable if not). It’s faulty logic, sir, the same unsound logic used by rapists who rape based on a woman “asking for it” by dressing a certain way.

Please though, keep defenestrating yourself out the logical window, and keep climbing those stairs back up to parry aimlessly.

I was not sure if you were actually serious or not but now that you are breaking out the “hey, look at me, I’m using big words to make myself look like an amazing pseudo intellectual who is smarter than everyone I am arguing with” I actually am still not certain if you are just being annoying on purpose or if you actually believe the bullshit you are spouting here.

Lovecraft, logic isn’t bullshit; it’s how you hopefully make decisions day-to-day in your life. No matter its expression, its basis remains the same.

You are now using an ad hominem fallacy. It should be deeply concerning to you that you are basing your argument on the length of a person’s words in response to your argument, and not the logical stability underpinning those words. Logic is complemented by rhetoric anyway (the difference between MLK saying “Let’s get this fucking equality shit going” and “I have a dream”).

Feel free to critique the logic of what I’ve said though; I have absolutely no problem with you doing that.

How did I just know you were going to bring up rape? It’s getting to the point where I can sense it coming from miles away. Anytime a woman does something and ends up getting the short end. When people point out ways she could have avoided this incident, you could bet your last dollar that someone is going to show up and say “This just like rapists who” or “this is like when a woman gets raped and people say”

Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit.

It’s the ultimate in logical fallacies and is a pathetic attempt to shut down dialogue by throwing out heinous comparisons. As a mother Gwen had a few options, she could have prepared some formula, pumped a few bottles of breast milk beforehand etc. Failing to do so created a situation where the child was hungry and she had no other option than to whip out that titty.

Her fault, nobody else’s. Being a high profile celebrity, she has cameras on her at all times. Hence we get a picture of her titty. There’s no expectation of privacy in a public place. So, tough titty for her (no pun intended).

Don, you’re just angry that your unchecked right to do largely whatever you want in terms of women is now being curtailed. (like a lot of men, myself included, it’s a struggle to get used to this new, and overdue, equality thing).

As I’ve said before, Stefani doesn’t have to prepare anything just so that you don’t look when she “whips out that titty” (stop undermining your argument by your poor diction). I don’t know what you don’t understand about the concept that she doesn’t have to pump beforehand just to avoid being photographed; the photographer is the active agent here, and he is in the wrong.

As I said before, and I stand by it, by valid extension, any woman dressing in any way shouldn’t have to take pre-measures to stop any man from looking; it’s you that’s looking. Take some responsibility for that and you’ll start to understand the situation here and how shitty it must be to be a woman getting ogled by perverts while she’s trying to feed her child.

Yes, because Gwen is the first woman to give birth and we haven’t developed alternatives so you can feed you kid without exposing yourself in public.

If you don’t want to be ogled don’t whip out your titty (fuck diction, this isn’t an English class) in public places. That goes double for famous people. Looking at women isn’t illegal. People have a right to look wherever they want.

The only person that needs to take responsibility here is Gwen. If she was really concerned about people seeing her titty, she would’ve prepared some bottles beforehand.

I guess you’re one of those people who think women should be able to do whatever they want, whenever they want and it’s everyone else’s responsibility to look away or move out of their way. Bullshit. That’s not the way it works.

That’s some nice feminist bullshit you’re slinging. Are you going to tell us about how we live in a rape culture next or are you going to give a speech about the all powerful patriarchy? Those are always good for a laugh.

She doesn’t want people looking at her boobs, maybe she should keep them covered in public places. They also make these fancy machines called breast pumps that allow mothers to store milk just for occasions like this.

I don’t care about how beautiful and natural it is, I don’t want to see it. And I’m a woman. Belching and farting is natural, and somewhat beautiful, but I don’t go around doing it in public.
I also don’t know why these celebs think I want to see a picture of them naked and pregnant. Like they are the first woman to bear a child.

Anyway, having said all that, I’m sure she didn’t mean for that to go public.

Having kids have done wonders for her boobs. She used to be flat chested. Now she’s got some great breasts. always been one of my favourite celebs. Been waiting to see this boob for almost 20 years now.

What is it with the red star? Totally stupid that something gets censored on the front page, but not after the jump. Could you guys quit being so prudish? And while I’m at it, could you knock it off with the second grade names you call each other?